User talk:Oblivion1
Welcome Hi, welcome to Bleach Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Espada page. Here's a wiki tip for you -- you can sign your name on talk/discussion pages by typing ~~~~ which automatically adds your signature and the date. Check out for more tricks. Also, remember that a wiki is a community, and that you'll almost always find someone to help you if you're having problems. Don't hesitate to ask for help! ;) Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Arrancar109 (Talk) 18:37, October 16, 2009 Espada Status I'm the one who changed it. I'm not exactly sure what Arrancar109 will say, but since Hallibel, Starrk, & Barragan users keep changing the status to a similar thing u had & it gets changed back. The last time i remember him asking not to change the status. I didn't mean u couldn't edit anything on this page. I'm sorry if i agitated u. Minato88 19:10, October 16, 2009 (UTC) Okay. Arrancar109 can be a little, well he doesn't like users just changing things which will usually result in him changing it back(u'd be surprised how much time he spends changing edits back). With that said, I would like to personnally welcome u here. I hope we can get along. If u want to discuss these Espada Status theories u have, I suggest u go to the watercooler & post a title & description of them. In the watercooler there are many current forums up for debate & u could possibly shed some light on the subject. Minato88 22:07, October 16, 2009 (UTC) Dude I like u, u are speaking my language. Some people ther wouldn't change their minds if u presented facts & only facts & they would argue with nothing, but their own speculation. For example a user named Hollowmajinbuu1 once stated that Ichigo is not a Vizard, but is some completely new species. He even goes as far as to say Ichigo was BORN with a hollows spirit & says that the reason Aizen is so interested in him is because Aizen thinks Ichigo is some unique species of Shinigami/Vizard/Arrancar(Yes the guy actually stated he thought Ichigo was an arrancar). When I corrected him on this & even gave him references to help him better understand Ichigo, he got mad at me & had the audacity to insult me; saying that i'm like alot of the othe users here & I type like Kubo is sitting next to me. Minato88 00:28, October 17, 2009 (UTC) Hard to believe isn't it. Its in the Forum Hollow Ichigos Power. I actually left a nice message(No i'm not being sarcastic, it was actually nice)on his talk page asking if he could provide a little proof to this as I was surprised(Though I knew he was wrong)I missed this(No Reply). Minato88 00:59, October 17, 2009 (UTC) It looks like your main concern is regarding Harribel and Starrk's fates. I, along with Salubri, have decided that they are dead. Don't get me wrong, it's not like I'm against them being alive (Starrk was always one of my favorite Espada), but the scenarios regarding them both seem pretty conclusive. Starrk's death scene shows his Hollow hole and the area around it beginning to crack, and then bleeding severely. Additionally, Kyoraku's zanpakuto was pretty clear on the rules: given that he was wearing mostly black (I'd say at least 90% black) when he cut down Starrk, the risk was greatest on himself, and would therefore inflict the most damage on his opponent, which did result in Starrk's fatal wounds. Personally, I think Kubo set it up to be clear that Starrk was killed. As for Harribel, Mashiro did state that Aizen killed her. Despite what some of us would like to think, a character's verbal statement is much more official than what any fan would like to believe, and when it comes down to us wiki-editors, that's what we are: fans, and only fans. The only situation as to where they would be stated as alive is if they turned up later showing any signs of life or if another character finds them and says they're alive. Until then, we're leaving both Starrk and Harribel's fates as "deceased". Also, in regards to what Minato88 said, he is correct. I do revert a lot of changes, but mostly because these changes are either speculation or just plain unnecessary. In all seriousness, the "Trivia" sections themselves take the most abuse, and much of what some people put is similar to stating "Ukitake's hair is white". A lot of what people put for Trivia becomes erased because of it being like that statement. Additionally, every once in awhile, someone does come on and attempt to change Harribel's name back to "Halibel", even though Kubo himself proved that the English spelling would be "Harribel", and we've established that the manga spelling supercedes other sources (which is why "Grimmjow Jeagerjaques" was changed into "Grimmjow Jaegerjaquez" and "Ulquiorra Schiffer" was changed into "Ulquiorra Cifer"). Minato88 was also wise to inform you of the Watercooler though. Yes, there are some hard-headed guys there, but that's the only place where you can start a thread with your views without it either resulting in an edit war or crowding up the Article Talk pages. Arrancar109 01:31, October 17, 2009 (UTC) Espada:Vasto Lordes Whats up, I just figured i'd ask your opinion on something. The Espada are being talked about more then any other group of characters, but the top 5 Ulquiorra, Hallibel, Barragan, Starrk, & Yammy are the ones most are talking about. Yammy has been excluded from the possibility of being a Lordes, but I was curious if u thought any of these others I listed were. I also forgot to ask for your opinion about Wonderweiss, do u think hes a Lordes. Minato88 22:59, October 17, 2009 (UTC) Cool, thanks for the reply. Minato88 03:06, October 18, 2009 (UTC) Bias Character statuses are in no way biased. Every single status has evidence to back it up. People disagree due to their own biases. When Aizen is killed I may try and say he is alive for a while but in the end it is just bias. Every character has their status set by hard facts of the manga--[[User:Godisme|'God']] (Pray) 03:59, August 28, 2010 (UTC) You said it yourself, we've had enough of people saying they don't agree with how we handle "status". I don't know what specific characters you're talking about, but if you're referring to the latest Gin case, even some of the most hardcore Gin fans are agreeing in the "Deceased" label. We rely not on our personal opinion but on the facts that the manga gives us. As an Ulquiorra fan, I would want to say "Kubo said in a interview" or whatever crap, but as long as the manga doesn't show him back alive, he's gonna stay dead. The same is going to happen to all the characters that have been confirmed dead by all our usual standards (confirmed by another character, the "flashback-monologue" formula, confirmed corpse/body disintegrating is seen, etc.) [[User:Lia Schiffer|'Lia Schiffer']] (Talk) 04:52, August 28, 2010 (UTC) Then I have no idea of what leads you to believe that the Wiki's position on character statuses are biased. As Godisme said, each and every one of them has evidence to back it up, and the few that don't (Kensei, for example) are considered "Unknown". But there are no longer "Status" in character templates, so there's no issue to argue over anymore. [[User:Lia Schiffer|'Lia Schiffer']] (Talk) 03:42, August 30, 2010 (UTC) RE:Deicide As far as where the information came from it was from a interview by Tite Kubo. For further information on it I believe Tinni knows the specifics. As to whether the smaller arc has started or has yet to start that is currently unknown and has not been confirmed.--[[User:Salubri|'Salubri']] [[User talk:Salubri|(Talk)]] 02:26, August 30, 2010 (UTC) RE: Status Characters are injured and characters engage in certain actions, characters also die. Thats a fact, removing information isn't productive to the point of the site which is to detail the information of the series. The status issue is over as far as im concerned. We go by what the manga details within the articles and that plain we dont go beyond that. So there would be nothing helpful by what you suggest, by that concept we should have no detail about anything. --[[User:Salubri|'Salubri']] [[User talk:Salubri|(Talk)]] 01:02, August 31, 2010 (UTC) RE:Timestamp There is no way to change ones time as far as I know. Also you might want to read the voting policy as im pretty sure your no eligible for voting under the parameters detailed. --[[User:Salubri|'Salubri']] [[User talk:Salubri|(Talk)]] 03:33, August 31, 2010 (UTC) Read the voting policy, you are not eligible because you do not have enough edits to the wiki this month--[[User:Godisme|'God']] (Pray) 03:36, August 31, 2010 (UTC)